Sometimes a Song...

...reminds you of how it was, and of things that will never leave your mind or your heart.

God Bless You, Don Williams, for giving us this song.

Good Ole Boys Like Me
by Don Williams

When I was a kid Uncle Remus he put me to bed
With a picture of Stonewall Jackson above my head
Then daddy came in to kiss his little man
With gin on his breath and a Bible in his hand
He talked about honor and things I should know
Then he'd stagger a little as he went out the door

CHORUS:
I can still hear the soft Southern winds in the live oak trees
And those Williams boys they still mean a lot to me
Hank and Tennessee
I guess we're all gonna be what we're gonna be
So what do you do with good ole boys like me

Nothing makes a sound in the night like the wind does
But you ain't afraid if you're washed in the blood like I was
The smell of cape jasmine thru the window screen
John R. and the Wolfman kept me company
By the light of the radio by my bed
With Thomas Wolfe whispering in my head

When I was in school I ran with kid down the street
But I watched him burn himself up on bourbon and speed
But I was smarter than most and I could choose
Learned to talk like the man on the six o'clock news
When I was eighteen, Lord, I hit the road
But it really doesn't matter how far I go

The WaPo Ombudsman and John Belushi

I love the movie Animal House. Even though I have it on DVD, it is one of few movies that if it happens to pop on television when I am channel surfing I am drawn to it like a bug to a zapper.

I especially love the scene where John Belushi (as future US Senator John Blutarski) comes down the steps during a fraternity toga party and forcibly shows his objection to a folk singer's song choice by grabbing the singer's guitar and wildly smashes it against the wall then hands the shattered pieces back to the singer with the comment, "sorry", then proceeds to other bacchanalian entertainment.

I think the Washington Post Ombudsman likes that same scene, as this is the method Deborah Howell has chosen to respond to criticism of the WaPo coverage of the Allen Senatorial campaign.

While conceding that the massive coverage the paper gave was overkill, the ombudsman goes on to rationalize the need for and give overall approval to the massive numbers of individual stories.

In one paragraph, Howell writes "Did The Post overplay the incident? Not initially, but the coverage went on for too long after he apologized", but finishes the paragraph by saying "No one piece was over the line. But when you put it all together, it looked [my emphasis added] like piling on".

Translation-we weren't really piling on.

Then, after noting that it only seemed like piling on, Mrs. Howell vacilates between using her report to editorialize and rationalize WaPo coverage (example: It was Allen's "sputtering response" Peggy Fox's coverage that served to justify coverage) and finding some way to tortuously show contrition (example: haltingly admiting the Post violated its own guidelines and standards in using anonymous sources to attack Senator Allen with unsubstantiated allegations).

Mrs. Howell also notes that: "Does all the coverage hurt Allen's reelection prospects? The stories -- six of them were on Page 1 -- don't help him, but there are five long weeks before Election Day."

So we are to infer from this that if the stories had come out closer to the election day the WaPo wouldn't have run them? Or is she really telling that it is OK for the WaPo to run inflammatory stories that violate the Post guidelines of fairness as long as we are not too close to election day?

The Washington Post does not like George Allen, and that is their right. But don't try to seem fair and balanced by attacking the man day in and day out, then print a buried Ombudsman report noting that things should have been done differently.

There is little sincerity and no honor in that course of action.

And in that, I guess it may not be fair to compare the WaPo to John Blutarski.

At least Blutarski said, "sorry."

Now for Something Really Bizarre...

As noted in an earlier post, the World Chess Championship is taking place even as I type in Elista, Russia.

However, due to some unusual protests it is only sort of taking place currently.

The match is between FIDE (the world governing body) World Champion Veselin Topalov of Bulgaria and Classical Champion Vladimir Kramnik of Russia. This match is also much, much more.

Many years ago former world champion Gary Kasparov broke with FIDE and attempted to start his own organization. Since Kasparov was clearly the strongest player in the world, the world regarded him as the champion even though he had not won through a FIDE cycle. Kramnik beat Kasparov a few years back to claim his title. Topalov has not only dominated world chess this year but also won the FIDE title. This is the match to reunify the titles...you know, just like boxing!

Chess players can be more than a little finicky, and the World Championships have been know for their fair share of strange challenges and demands. Eating habits have been challenged, espionage and hypnotism charged, and outright cheating alleged.

The 12 game match has begun with 2 wins for Kramnik and 2 draws. At one point for a win and 1/2 point for a draw, he has a 3-1 lead.

But the Elista match offers us something really bizarre.

Each player has a private lavatory, complete with an LCD in the wall so players can see and reflect on the board position while they "attend to business". Topalov claims, and has submitted videotape in support of his point, that Kramnik spends far more time in the bathroom than at the board. Topalov suggests this this is not only not consistent with the traditions of Over The Board play, but that Kramnik could be getting assistance during these frequent trips.

In order to keep the peace and continue the match, the sponsors have decided to create a single shared (but spacious and luxurious) bathroom that players will share.

This partially mollified Topalov, who through advisors asked that players also be accompanied by a FIDE arbiter to ensure the players do not receive aid.

Kramnik protested the decision, saying it was in violation of the match contract he signed.

So, we come to game Five. The single bathroon has been built, and the individual bathrooms locked. Kramnik refused to come out and play until his bathroom was unlocked. While he sat and stewed his lost the game on a time forfeit.

Now Kramnik demands that game five be replayed, or else he will walk.

They have wondered why chess has not taken off in the USA, and I have to agree. Behavior like this is infantile to end up on the front page of US Weekly and the National Inquirer, which makes it the perfect stuff to capture the attention of a public smitten with Paris Hilton and the like!

Big weekend for Non Visible Sports

I am a competition guy, and have been since I was a kid. I follow Div 1A college football and basketball (living and dieing with the ACC season), but I am a die hard Redskins fan, and have more than a passing interest in golf and tennis, and every season follow each pitch of the World Series.

However, my real thrill has always been in events I participate in, which tend to be the Non-Visible sports or competitions...and the world is are now fully loaded with them.

The World Chess Championship is taking now in Elista, Russia between Bulgarian GM Vladimir Topalov and Russian GM Vladimir Kramnik. Kramnik leads 3-1 in a 12 game match, but Topalov has essentially accused Kramnik of cheating and is threatening to bail.

In Las Vegas, the professional bodybuilding world is gathered for the Mr. Olympia competition, waiting to see if Ronnie Coleman can win an unprecedented ninth consecutive Mr. Olympia title.

On the small scale gridiron, my alma mater takes on the Bow Ties of Hampden Sydney College in a homecoming showdown at Jopson Field in Bridgewater, Virginia. BC is riding a 35 conference game winning streak within the Old Dominion Athletic Conference.

Oh, and there is that small, ongoing matter of an election campaign...

Newest Silliness over Gas Prices

Of the many silly screeds making the rounds this election season, the one I find to be cheerfully ridiculous is that gas prices are falling as we head toward election day to help Republican candidates.

Of course, the only problem with this inane idea is that if you believe that the GOP has enough pull to lower gas prices, then logically you have to believe they used that same pull to drive up gas prices to over $3.00 and suffer political ills as a result.

This is a silly issue and a silly proposition. What isn't silly is the fact that fuel flucuation like hurts us all. It makes it more difficult to manage our family budgets, and increased gas prices lead to increased transportation costs which are inevitably passed on to the consumer.

What we need, and neither the GOP or Democrats are willing to offer, is a reasonable energy plan that can make this country less dependent on other parts of the world...but that will likely happen about the same time that the Democratic conspiracy nuts stop attributing supernatural pricing power to the Republicans.

Where the Book Fair meets the Open Primary

Steven Rankin is the proprieter of the Southern Crown blog. A Mississippi man, he and I struck up a correspondence regarding the current open/closed primaries litigation in Virginia and Mississippi.

You may know that there is a case in the Virginia Courts that could eliminate the use of open primary for nominating candidates in Virginia. You may not know that there is a similar law suit working its say up the ladder in Mississippi. In fact, it is in part because of this mirrored situation that Steve submitted a title for the Book Fair.

As the Book Fair was intended as a place to exchange titles and reading ideas, I held back the bulk of his email. However, his analysis of the current situation, taken in concert with the title he submitted, convinced me his note were worthy of a post of their own:

"I've just purchased from Amazon (for an amazingly low price) the 2002 book, Voting at the Political Fault Line: California's Experiment with the Blanket Primary. Its editors are Bruce Cain of UC-Berkeley and Elisabeth Gerber of the University of Michigan.

California used the blanket primary in 1998 and 2000, before the U. S. Supreme Court struck it down in California Democratic Party v. Jones. This case, of course, is the main precedent for the Virginia Republicans' and the Mississippi Democrats' federal lawsuits against their states' open-primary laws.

After reading what this book says about open primaries, I'm even more convinced that mandatory open primaries will be declared unconstitutional. At this point, it looks as though the Virginia case has the best chance of reaching the U. S. Supreme Court first. If so, Miller v. Brown will precipitate a landmark ruling.

The book also mentions the "top two" system ("nonpartisan primary"), in which all candidates run in the same election, with the top two vote-getters, regardless of party, advancing to the runoff. Louisiana is currently alone in using the "top two" to elect all of its state officials, although efforts are underway to install the "top two" in Washington state and Oregon.

The book agrees with me that the "top two" is constitutional, and it's too bad that four judges in Washington state have apparently not read it, as two federal courts there have recently struck down Washington's "top two" initiative.

Last week the state announced that it will appeal Washington State Republican Party v. State to the U. S. Supreme Court.

BTW: I think the "top two" is fine for judicial and local elections, but I personally despise it for state and congressional elections. I believe that political parties deserve to be able to officially nominate candidates for those offices.

-- Steve Rankin
Jackson, Mississippi
http://southerncrown.blogspot.com/

**********

I urge you to take a gander at his blog...thoughtful analysis, excellent writing style, and marvelous taste in blog composition!

Fall 2006 Virginia Blogosphere Book Fair-Titles by Blogger Submitting

Hello, and welcome to Day Two of the Fall 2006 Virginia Blogosphere Book Fair!

Today I present books as submitted by members of the blogosphere. If links were submitted with the titles, I have edited the submission so the URL is linked to the title of the book. Comments are-for the most part-as submitted (corrections for spelling were made, etc.).

Contributors were asked to send in up to five titles. Where more than five titles were submitted, I had to edit to keep the playing field level. My rule of thumb: If a blog is primarily political, then I printed the title submissions that were non-political or atypical of the blog content. If a blog is not political, and there were more than five titles, then I listed the political books.

Logic? Let's find out something new about the members of our blogosphere. No one is surprised if a GOP blogger or a democratic blogger submits a book bashing the other side, but might be interested in seeing what else said blogger is reading. However, if a non-political type submitted a political book, then it was used because-again-it offers up a different point of view on that blogger.

One blogger in a remarkable display of economcy sent me his Amazon Wish List (that did have more than five titles), so I have simply linked to that list while giveing a sampling of what awaits.

Also, if more folks submit titles, I will add them to the list...it is still not too late!

Books are grouped by blogger and their blog. Blogger comments on their submissions are typically are in italics, but sometimes I used italics for the title.

You will catch on...and away we go!

***********************************

NORM LEAHY-One Mans'Trash

George Mason, Forgotten Founder
by Jeff Broadwater

I haven't read it yet (it should be arriving any day), but I can tell from the reviews I've read so far that this will become a must-read for anyone who wishes to have a better understanding of one of the most important and principled members of the founding generation.

The Road to Serfdom
by F.A. Hayek

The book that launched a thousand classical liberal boats

On Liberty
by John Stuart Mill

One of the most important works on individual freedom ever written. Its
relevance only grows greater with time.

Dubliners
by James Joyce

This collection of Joyce's short stories is, quite simply, stunning. If you
read only one story, make sure it is "The Dead," the most heart-breakingly
beautiful creation by any author in the 20th Century. And if you have the
chance, and aren't shy, read the last paragraphs aloud -- the words fall like
the snow: softly, quietly, completely.

The Brothers Karamozov
by Fyodor Dostoyevsky

A difficult work, to be sure. But also a stunning artistic achievement that
takes us on a jopurney through the Russian soul. The dialogue with Satan is one of the most thought-provoking passages in any language.


STEVE RANKIN (southerncrown.blogspot.com)

I've just purchased from Amazon (for an amazingly low price) the 2002 book, Voting at the Political Fault Line: California's Experiment with the Blanket Primary.

Its editors are Bruce Cain of UC-Berkeley and Elisabeth Gerber of the University of Michigan.


NOT BUCK TURGIDSON (vawarroom.blogpost.com)

Warrior Politics: Why Leadership Demands a Pagan Ethos
That crunching sound you hear is the last bit of your idealism dying. Kaplan's book is the ultimate work of Realpolitik, proving to me at least that high ideals are the road to hell in foreign relations.

Deliver the Vote: A History of Electoral Fraud in America
Think Florida was the first time an election went south or was stolen? Think again. The first record of vote buying in this country predates the republic... and the purpetrator was George Washington.

Storm from the East
The single best primer on the history of Islamic-Christian conflict I've ever read. A small book that takes you from the revelation to Mohammed to the U.S. Invasion of Iraq. Conservatives be warned, it does smack the Bush Administration upside the head, but there's much to be learned here.

Hunters of Dune
Just a plain old good book. I'm a huge Dune fan, and this penultimate novel doesn't disappoint.

How the Republicans Stole Christmas
Should be required reading for every state/federal politician. Bill Press talks about the intersection of faith and politics, and where both parties have gone wrong. I'm not much of a liberal, but I found myself agreeing with him most of the time. A very good, eye opening book.


VIVIAN PAIGE(http://vivianpaige.wordpress.com/)
All Politics is Local by Tip O'Neill
Conservatives Without Conscienceby John Dean


JIM BACON (Bacon’s Rebellion)
Hi, Bwana, Here are a couple of submissions. These are books that I am reading right now:


Insurgents, Terrorists and Militias
by Richard H. Schultz and Andrea Dew

This book deepens the understanding of the foe the United States is facing in the War on Terror and military conflicts in the Middle East. Using insights from anthropology, Schultz and Dew explore the warrior ethos in "primitive" societies, with fascinating case studies like Somalia and Chechnya.

Street Smart: Competition, Entrepreneurship and the Future of Roads
Edited by Gabriel Roth

"Street Smart" consists of a series of essays that examine solutions to traffic congestion from a free-market perspective. The solution is not to raise taxes and add capacity to accommodate demand (which is limitless when someone else pays for it), the authors argue, it is to put into place pricing mechanisms that make people pay for access to roads when and where they want it.


THE VALLEY BLUE DOG

Why Americans Hate Politics by E.J. Dionne Jr
Third time I've read Dionne's book -- Excellent draft on politics in modern America

Theory of Constraints by Eliyahu M. Goldratt
Recommended by a friend

Critical Chain by Eliyahu M. Goldratt
Recommended by a friend

Unhinged - Exposing Liberals Gone Wild by Michelle Malkin
Why am I a Democrat? Who knows why after reading Michelle's satirical expose

The Unshakeable Kingdom And The Unchanging Person by E. Stanley Jones
Pass the cornbread and say Amen

Finally, there is a book the Blue Dog simply loooves that is written by some guy named Steve Sisson can be found here
Bwana sez-"I wonder what that is all about?" ;-)


THE MASON CONSERVATIVE

Here are my book submissions. I'm trying to find some obscure ones that I have that might generate some interest.

The Shadow of Blooming Grove
by Francis Russell

An enormously entertaining of Warren G. Harding. It reads like a novel. Probably the best written, most engrossing biography I have EVER read. Its huge, but took me only three days too read because I never put it down. Its older, 1968, but holds up very well. Harding is from Blooming Grove, Ohio and the "shadow" is the rumor he had black blood in him. You get a top-notch political biography and large window into what was the crazy, crazy world of turn-of-the-century Ohio politics.

Rum, Romanism, & Rebellion: The Making of a President, 1884
by Mark Walhgren Summers

As it states, a history of the wildly exciting presidential election of 1884 between James G. Blaine of Maine (the first non-general the GOP had nominated since Lincoln) and Grover Cleveland, the popular, and rotund, reform Governor of New York (AND ex-mayor of Buffalo, my families home town). It will make any campaign today look like church. And Summers takes the perfect tone, mixing the seriousness of the issues
with the clownish nature of the way the newspapers covered it. Summers really gives color to an era, The Gilded Age, that is thought of in steel gray. I've read this four times, and its better every time.

Battle Cry of Freedom
by James McPherson

The absolute, number 1, KICKASS one volue history of the Civil War. In almost 1,000 pages McPherson nails almost every single possible angle of the Civil War and its just tremendous. If there is ONE book on the Civil War you could read, this is it.

Burr
by Gore Vidal

I am a big fan of historical fiction--thought not alternative history. Vidal does the unthinkable and tell a story with Aaron Burr, the black sheep of the Revolutionary family, as almost the hero, weaving the entire story of the Revolution and the Jacksonian era into Burr's long, succesful, tragic, and controversial life. Sometimes fiction can tell a person's tale better than fact. His other books in this series are good, especially Lincoln, but this one is the best.

Henry Clay: Statesman for the Union
by Robert V. Remini

This is the first history book I ever read cover-to-cover, and the first one I ever bought with my own money. If I had to pick oner American political figure in history that I would want to meet in life, it would be Henry Clay. Remini, as usual, is a master and the premier historian of the Jackson era. This is my sentimental pick, and one of my absolute
favore biographies of all time.


STEVE MINOR (SWVA LAW)

Steve submitted several titles, all of which can be found at the site hyperlinked to his name above. Some representative samples (dealing with Virgina) include:

Breaking Out: VMI and the Coming of Women (Vintage) by Laura Fairchild Brodie
Justice Lewis F. Powell, Jr. by John C., Jr. Jeffries
Soldier Of Southwestern Virginia: The Civil War Letters Of Captain John Preston Sheffey by John Preston Sheffey
A Murder in Virginia: Southern Justice on Trial by Suzanne Lebsock
J. Lindsay Almond: Virginia's Reluctant Rebel by Ben Beagle


James Atticus Bowden
This is just a topical reading list, but not my all time favorites. These books (except the first, which is the absolute favorite), frame many issues I write about and show you what I am reading today.

The Holy Bible (NIV or KJV)
The owner's manual for humans written by the Creator. Never gets old. Insights for individuals with every reading. Best read daily.

The Rise of the West by William H. McNeill
A multi-disciplinary approach to the whole of recorded human history 3000 BC to the present. Shows the way of the world on why things change and how.

The Culture Wars, The Struggle to Define America
by James Davison Hunter
A UVa scholar defines the issues based on insights from the late 1980s...a prescient work that still rings true.

One Nation, Two Cultures by Gertrude Himmelfarb
Another scholarly work showing the roots of the division and the intellectual history of the ideas that divide America.

Lee’s Lieutenants (D.S. Freeman) and Atlas Shrugged (Ayn Rand)
My current open books.


LOWELL FELD (Raising Kaine)

The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century by Thomas L.
Friedman

Freakonomics Rev Ed: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything bySteven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner

Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking by Malcolm Gladwell

Fiasco: The American Military Adventure in Iraq by Thomas E. Ricks

Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies New Edition by Jared
Diamond (Hardcover - Jul 11, 2005)

Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed by Jared Diamond


BWANA (Renaissance Ruminations)

The Campaign of the Century: Upton Sinclair's Race for Governor of California and the Birth of Media Politics
by Greg Mitchell

The first great media campaign

A Godly Hero : The Life of William Jennings Bryan
by Michael Kazin

The Great Populist, and author and deliverer of perhaps the greatest convention speech in American history. The chapter on the 1896 convention offers some not-so-common details about how the "Cross of Gold" speech was delivered.

The Power Broker: Robert Moses and the Fall of New York
by Robert A. Caro

Perhaps the greatest political biography of the 20th century, and one where Caro first tries to expose what drives men to want power, and what they will do to get it.

Lincoln at Cooper Union: The Speech That Made Abraham Lincoln President
by Harold Holzer

There are some speeches we are so familiar with that brief phrases bring them to life...words like "I have a dream", "ask not", "moutaintop", and "fear itself", plus a whole raft of Churchill quotes, bring to mind speeches that captured public opinion and changed history. We remember Lincoln at Gettysburg and in his Second Inagural address, but few remember his Cooper Union speech...which is ironic, because it is this speech that put him on the road to the White House, and without which all those other speeches referenced above may never have happened!


Burying Caesar: The Churchill-Chamberlain Rivalry
by Graham Stewart

A fairly recent and significant addition to the Churchill literature that tracks the long standing political rivalry between the Churchill's and the Chamberlain's, which came to full fruition in the 1930's as Churchill urged first the Baldwin government and then the Chamberlain government to rearm while Chamberlain chose the path of appeasement even as Nazi Germany prepared for war. Fascinating comparison of attitude, philosophy, and political style in a parliamentary democracy.

************************************

Well, this is the list so far. If you have something to add, please email them to renaissanceruminations@hotmail.com, and please include amazon or B/N hyperlinks if you can!

Healthcare Hypocrisy

In the midst of the Allen-Weber madness, something happens in politics that make sme smile...and I must thank the Richmond War Room for pointing the way.

Judy Feder is running against GOP incumbent congressman Frank Wolf in the Va10 congressional district. As detailed at Richmond War Room, Ms. Feder has created an attack page off her website. And she really wants an issue to run on, but no matter which way she turns she gets no traction.

And although I live in the 11th district, watching her has been fun...and her site provides more giggles.

Ms. Feder has attacked Mr. Wolf for supporting big oil. She then tried to lump in donations from oil company employees and also a Manassas family business that sells heating fuel oil to make her argument. Not only did she not successfully make the connection, her gas station photo op fell apart as gas prices fell. Of course, it didn't help that she has gotten more $$ in this cycle from liberal health care advocates than Mr. Wolf has gotten from so-called "big oil" in his entire career.

Then, in a speech available on YouTube, she criticized legislators who do nothing to stop traffic congestion by slowing development...ignoring the Hallowed Ground historic district that Frank Wolf co-sponsored that will aid historic preservation by slowing willy nilly development. Two birds for the price of one!

Of course, she gave that speech outside her district, so maybe she was refering to Someone else.

Now, on her new site, she attacks Mr. Wolf for being wrong on healthcare.

I imagine her charge would make more sense if one did not know that Mrs. Feder was lead staff member for Hillary Clinton in creating a new national health care plan that would let the government decide what doctor you could go to, that was exorbitantly expensive, and was so bad that the package was Dead b-4 arrival on capitol hill.

I appreciate that Mrs. Feder is desperate to find an issue that will allow her to get some traction. However, I seriously doubt that healthcare is going to be a winner for her...because every time she talks about Mr. Wolf's track record on health care, Wolf will talk about hers.

...and I think we all know who is going to get the better of that discussion!

Fall 2006 Virginia Blogosphere Book Fair-Virginia Books

Welcome to the Fall 2006 Virginia Blogosphere Book Fair!

This serves as an effort to provide the denizens of the blogosphere to lay down their partisan cudgels and share intellectual sustenance by telling the world what books they have been reading recently or books they recommend others read.

Today we invite you to Part One of the Book Fair, a selection devoted solely to books about Virginia Politics. This is in great part a repeat of a post in the New-Domnion blog from November 2005. This post is still up, and the original included submission comments about why various books were must read books.

In addition to those entries, there are new biographies that have come out in the last year about Virginia politics, politicians, or history, and they are listed at the end of the post.

Since posting this list 30 minutes ago, I was asked to include hyperlinks for them. This is a lengthy list, and many of the books are no longer in print-which would necessitate an internet search anyway. So, I will take an intermediate step for now and hyperlink all the new books (plus the initial Frank Atkinson book, which has just been re-released). I will add links to the other titles as I get the opportunity.

Peruse, enjoy, and stay tuned for Part Two-Current Books grouped by subject-and part Three-Current books grouped by submitting bloggers

Classics:
Notes on the State of Virginia by Thomas Jefferson
Jefferson and his Time (biography in six volumes) by Dumas Malone

General Virginia History (including fiction)

Virginia: the New Dominion by Virginius Dabney

The Shad Treatment by Garrett Epps

Southern Politics in State and Nation (V. O. Key's , 1949)

Changing Politics of the South, focus on Ralph Eisenberg chapter on Virginia

Conversations with Colgate (by Guy Fridell)

The Governors of Virginia, 1860–1978 Edward Younger and James T. Moore, eds.

The Transformation of Southern Politics: Social change and political consequence since 1945 by Jack Bass

Early Virginia and Revolutionary Era:

A Little Parliament: the Virginia General Assembly in the 17th Century by Warren Billings

Antebellum Period:

Pistols and Pointed Pens: The Dueling Editors of Old Virginia by Virginius Dabney (I hope the Allen and Webb bloggers do not get crazy ideas at ten paces!)

John Randolph of Roanoke: A Study in American Politics, With Selected Speeches and Letters by Russell Kirk

Senator James Murray Mason: Defender of the Old South by Robert W. Young

Roots of Secession: Slavery and Politics in Antebellum Virginia by William A. Link

Reconstruction through the Martin Organization:

Bourbonism to Byrd by Alan Moger

Westmoreland Davis: Planter-Politician by Jack Temple Kirby

Dry Messiah by Virginius Dabney


The Byrd Era:

Harry Byrd and the Changing Face of Virginia Politics: 1945-1966 by (none other than 4th Circuit Court Judge) J. Harvie Wilkinson, III

Harry Byrd of Virginia by Ronald L. Heinemann

Virginia and the New Deal (y Ronald L. Heinemann)

Bill Tuck, a political life in Harry Byrd's Virginia by William Bryan Crawley

J. Lindsay Almond: Virginia's Reluctant Rebel by Ben Beagle and Ozzie Osbourne

A Man from the Valley by Francis Pickens Miller

The Crisis of Conservative Virginia: The Byrd organization and the Politics of Massive Resistance (Twentieth-century America series) by James W Ely

The Rise of Massive Resistance: Race and Politics in the South During the 1950s by Numan V. Bartley

Modern Developments:

The Dynamic Dominion: Realignment and the Rise of Virginia's Republican Party Since 1945 by Frank Atkinson

-----Books about Doug Wilder-----
When Hell Froze Over by Dwayne Yancey
Claiming the Dream Margaret Edds
Hold Fast to Dreams Donald Baker

Sarge Reynolds: In the Time of His Life by Andy McCutcheon and Michael P. Gleason

-----Works by Larry Sabato, including: -----
Virginia Votes (all volumes)
The Democratic Party Primary in Virginia: Tantamount to Election No Longer
and
Virginia Government and Politics: Readings and Comments (co-authored by Thomas Morris of Emory and Henry).

Campaign Dynamics by Thomas Carsey (due to section on 1993 Virginia Gubernatorial campaign)

Notes from the Sausage Factory by our friends at Bacon’s Rebellion

Recent Works and Additions to the above list:

Virginia in the Vanguard: Political Leadership in the 400-Year-Old Cradle of American Democracy, 1981-2006 by Frank Atkinson…a continuation of his earlier work on the Virginia Politics

John Tyler, the Accidental President by Edward Crapol. Heartily endorsed by The Mason Conservative, who offers a full review.

George Mason, Forgotten Founder by Jeff Broadwater, and submitted by Norm Leahy. His comment: “I haven't finished reading it… but I can tell … that this will become a must-read for anyone who wishes to have a better understanding of one of the most important and principled members of the founding generation.”

Claude A. Swanson of Virginia: A Political Biography by Henry C., Jr. Ferrell. Biography of the man with the plan between the death of Tom Martin and the rise of Harry Byrd.


Carter Glass: A Biography by Rixey Smith and Norman Beasely. Account of the life of the man who was the Father of the Federal Reserve, congressman, and US Senator.

Feel free to add to this list by submitting additional titles via the comments!

The Election is over, and other thoughts...

As I kill time waiting to head off to the dentist for round #2 of a quasi-botched crown job, the beneficial coincidence of quiet time in my asylum (all the WMD are still asleep) and a large jolt of COSTCO java has led me to some new views on the current mud bath that is the US Senate election in Virginia 2006.

1. The election is over

I don't know who is going to win. The Webb campaign has been able to use macaca to avoid an issues campaign. Between questions about Allen's reactions to revelations about his jewish heritage and hints and allegations of questionable to unusual behavior (which the Webb campaign still uses its bloggers to keep up, while Webb refuses to comment) means that voters have likely either decided that Allen is a racist OR Allen is a man unjustly accused by a desperate opponent. I think the latest allegations of the use of the "N" word by unnamed teammates will a polarizing effect, driving folks to one end of the Allen spectrum or the other. When the campaign is over, this announcement will be seen as the final turning point of the campaign.

2. Allen will not be withdrawing

Our friends over at NLS are speculating that Allen will withdraw from this race. Such speculation is silly.

Elected officials are human, all doubts to the contrary notwithstanding. Losing an election allows one to claim the electorate was duped by a calculating opponent using deceit and lies. Withdrawing effectively admits the charges are true. No withdrawal.

Also, with whom who would the GOP replace Allen? Move in Tom Davis and the Democrats likely pick up the 11th district. I think you could pull off a late move to Eric Cantor, given how strongly GOP the 7th is, but would Cantor give up a ranking position in the House for a frosh spot in the Senate? Doubtful. Moving past them, who do you take?

Gilmore? Feh
Kilgore? double Feh
Bolling or McDonnell? After what happened to Dick Davis in 1982, doubtful.
Harry Byrd, Jr? Too late for a comeback
John Chichester? Oy

Besides, with only 40 days left it is near impossible to get someone out there and competitive with a major party candidate who has been in the field for almost a year.
No replacement.

3. Allen loss will help GOP House candidates

I may be way off base here, but hear me out.

There is a reason why Congress as a whole keeps getting low marks in public polling but the membership doesn't turn over. While there are the benefits of incumbency and partisan redistricting, I bet there are a lot of folks who like their congressman while being unhappy with the instution. I also suspect that there are folks out there who want a way to register their disapproval of the Bush administration while supporting their congressman (who they like, respect, etc.) A split ticket-vote Democrat in the Senate election, GOP in the House election-would allow them to do that...and the bad press for Allen will continue to make that option very palatable to a lot of folks.

We shall see!

Pre Book Fair Recommendation

The Fall 2006 Virginia Blogosphere Book Fair is right around the corner, and we will be offering a list of books for consideration.

In the meantime, I want to make a recommendation to you that will educate, enlighten, and delight you.

Go out and purchase, borrow, or check out from your nearest library all of Robert Caro's books and start reading them.

It is not just that his books offer excellent writing. It is not that he is able to capture times in our history with a feel that is both deft and powerful. It is not that his constant inquiries into power, its use, and its effect are incisive and telling.

No, you should do it for the biographies within the biographies.

In the movie "The Wind and the Lion" Brian Keith as Teddy Roosevelt says that, upon hearing that he likes J.P. Morgan,

"The road traveled by great men is dark ... and lonely ... and lit, only at intervals, by other great men ... and sometimes they are your enemy."

Mr. Caro apparently believes this, as he uses this idea as a building block in all his books.

Mr. Caro has written four books, and is at work on a fifth. One is a biography of Robert Caro, the other three and part of a four book bio of Lyndon Johnson. Within each books Mr. Caro writes a mini biography or men who served as supporters, allies or opponents to the book's subject.

Book/Subject/Mini-Bio's
The Power Broker/Robert Caro/Al Smith (supporter) and Nelson Rockefeller (opponent)
The Path to Power/LBJ/Sam Rayburn (supporter)
Means of Ascent/LBJ/Coke Stevenson (opponent)
Master of the Senate/LBJ/Richard B. Russell (supporter) and Hubert Humphrey (Ally)

These are not small bits of verbiage. I recall the 1983 review of The Path to Power, which praised Mr. Caro for his 15,000 word mini-bio of Sam Rayburn and suggested that for the time being this was actually the definitive work on Rayburn.

Mr. Caro's concept is clear. In each book there are people who serve as the great force, either in concert with or in opposition to, the subject of the book and the work the subject was doing.

Mr. Caro's books are long, and often wordy. But they are good-his four books have won at least two Pulitzer Prizes and numerous other awards.

They are worth the time, and the breadth of knowledge and information you gain from reading them is well worth your time!

Bummed

Bummed...c'est moi.

Since I was a little fellow, I have followed the newspaper comics...and politics. I had little choice. Every morning from early JHS my father would grab the sports, my mother the style section, so I could read the WaPo or WashStar A section, Metro section, or comics.

I have always enjoyed political or commentary type cartoons. I have enjoyed Doonesbury for decades, I loved Bloom County, and I am still sitting shiva for Calvin and Hobbs.

Recently, I developed an affection for the strip Boondocks, and while I was disappointed when it went on hiatus I had it's return in October to look forward to.

Now, however, it seems that may not happen. Instead, it is delayed indefinitely.

And that's why I am bummed.

At the Net

There is nothing more exciting in tennis than two good serve and volley players at the net whacking away at each other...exciting, and good fun.

Today we see the same thing today in the Virginia Blogosphere...

At NotLarrySabato, Ben Tribbet reports a Salon article that quotes a classmate of George Allen who claims the Senator-as an undergraduate-used racist language.

Meanwhile, at Bearing Drift Jim Hoeft notes that the person making the claim is not exactly someone who passes the partisan smell test, and suggests that the rest of the article doesn't show Allen to be the racist that Webb supporters claim him to be.

Editorial comment-Of course, this would be about the Webb supporters, because the Webb campaign won't deign to say whether Webb thinks Allen is a racist.

Making the most sense is Chris at Mason Conservative, who echoes my frustration that this campaign will hinge not on issues, or what either candidate wants to do in the next six years-instead it is going to hinge on whether or not voters think Allen is a racist...and the blogosphere has contributed significantly to this condition.

Red State, Blue State, Bad Signs and Branding

Last night yours truly and She Who Must be Obeyed had a rare chance to go out to dinner. As we drove down Va. 29 toward Fairfax Corner, She noted how similiar the Davis and Hurst signs were (both have blue backgrounds, white lettering, and I believe some red trim for accent), and how the Davis signs so outnumbered the Hurst signs that combined it seemed as if there were only Davis signs.

It struck me that this is the inadvertent result of the MSM map switch of 1992-1996.

Throughout the 1970's and 1980's, the national networks regularly used blue to denote GOP candidates and states that had voted republican. Red was the province of the Democrats. I recall clearly in the Jack Germond/Jules Whitecover book of the 1984 campaign compared the spreadin blue on the map of the Reagan landslide as resembling a suburban swimming pool.

Candidates of each party often used these assigned colors in creating their candidate signs. The primary example-Ronald Reagan's 1980/1984 signs had a navy blue background with white lettering.

Then-I guess in the Presidential 3-way of 1992-colors got switched around and by 1996 the MSM had reassigned red to the GOP and blue to the democrats...and this assignment of color is now embraced by both parties. Democratic states are "blue states", GOP states are "red states", and competitive states are assigned some shade of Purple.

Here is where the challenge begins...

Signs for any going concern are part of of developing a brand. McDonalds, Target, Starbuck's and others are readily recognized by a visual symbol they have developed as their brand. Candidates do the same thing.

The GOP never gave up on using blue, and have refused to adopt red as the dominant color for their campaign posters. Republicans like Frank Wolf and Tom Davis, who were first elected to congress when blue was very much the GOP color, have used it as the background in their signs for years.

The thing is that now you have Democratic candidates who have decided that they will use the blue background for their posters, also. That list includes James Webb and Andrew Hurst in 2006 and James Socas and Ken Longmeyer in 2004. They try using different fonts and colors for the letters on the posters, but the background remains blue and blends in with the colors of their established opposition, making it difficult to pick out at a distance and not as eye catching even up close.

I don't know why challengers select campaign colors that are so much like their opponents...I presume there is some psychological reason that blue is so prevalent, plus the visual clarity of white on blue.

Still, I keep hoping someone will adopt and bring back some of my favorite campaign sign colors:

Chuck Robb: red background, black lettering, with white trim around the letters to help them stand out. (I have read that the red+black+white combo is the most effective for catching the eye)

Herb Bateman: Yellow background, black lettering, white trim

Lynwood Holton: Lime green (sort of) background, blue letters

GOP General Assembly candidates in the 1975-85 time frame: White background, Candidate name in black, office running for in red (see r/b/w observation above.

All time least favorite-a gentleman who shall remain nameless was running in a primary for the Virginia HOD down in Richmond circa 1981. He had a brown background, tan lettering, and used a font that made it look like his name had been spelled out using a rope.

This guy definitely should have gone for the blue.

Hypocrisy and Bloviation

In the 19th century, the commment was "There are three types of lies - lies, damn lies, and statistics." This comment has been attributed to Benjamin Disraeli, Alfred Marshall, Mark Twain and probably-if you Google long enough-you can find it attributed to Whistler's Mother. It applied to politics, business, and other contact sports.

Nowadays, we have something different...it is the dynamic dueo of Hypocrisy and Bloviation

We all know about Hyprocrisy. The American Heritage dictionary defines it as: The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness (OR) An act or instance of such falseness.

Bloviate has many uses, generally about speaking pompously. But my favorite definition comes from WordNet, which gives the definition as to "orate verbosely and windily"...and, I might add, without adding much to the public debate.

I mention these things as I suspect we are about to be hit by a deluge of both as the congressional campaigns head into the homestretch...naturally, I am likely going to have the chance to chat about these in the weeks ahead.

Nope, I don't have a crystal ball...but I do have a r-e-a-l-l-y strong hunch

I Win Elections...Hear Me for My Cause

There. I said it. And although I doubt there willbe a path beaten to my door, it's true.

I had an ephiphany this AM. I was discussing current events at the playground after a soccer game. You can imagine it...a clustering of soccer mom's and NASCAR dad's, surrounded by children trying to do Flying Wallenda moves off the top of the sliding board, oblivious to the possibility of harm. I apparently made an observation that impressed one of the fathers, because he said, "have you ever thought about running for office?".

Bwana reply-yes
NASCAS Dad-Why don't you?
Bwana-Because I couldn't win

The conversation then spriraled off into assurances that I would be a great candidate, that I should run for something, why can't we get better folks to run for office, etc.

But the truth is, you see, that no matter how dynamic I might be perceived as, or how skilled a speaker I might be, I could never win. Why? Because I could never get a nomination. I am not a litmus test kind of guy. I would fail the test in either party...and as a result I and those like me could never get on the ballot.

For example, the Democrats wouldn't take me for various resons, not the least because I believe in second amendment rights, because I am personally pro-life, and because I see no harm in prayer in schools.

The Republicans wouldn't have me because while I am pro-life, I think reproductive matters are a matter of conscience between the individual and the Almighty and that government should not get involved; while I am pro gun rights I really don't see the benefit of allowing private citizens to own automatic weapons; and I think that sex education and providing instruction in prophylaxis in public schools probably would solve more problems than it creates.

So there you are...I have beliefs that put me beyond the pale of the small coterie that runs the GOP and the Democrats.

Yes, this puts me outside the pale of party regularity...however, it also puts me solidly in the middle of the folks who win elections in this country. You see, I like solutions that promote practical results and limit government intrusion as opposed to lock step devotion to an ideological laundry list.

I don't think I am alone.

We in this large group are not in agreement on all the issues. However, we have one thing in common...we also are not in 100% agreement with the litmus test ideologies of both parties.

We want commonsense solutions that keep federal powers limited. Failing that, because we know there are some problems that are so big the feds need to be the driving force, let the federal power be used effectively and not excessively or willy nilly.

We dream of a society that will recognize and enrich those who risk and excel, yet shows concern and support for the least among us. We may even agree with Hubert Humphrey, who said "The moral test of a government is how it treats those who are at the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the aged; and those who are in the shadow of life, the sick, the needy, and the handicapped."

We are smart enough to know when grander folks are spraying on our shoes and calling it a rainstorm; we see through the negative advertising and the hypocrisy so rampant in todays political campaigns.

So to any candidate that hears this cry in the dark-don't take us for granted. Take us seriously.

Remember that although we don't have the time to devour the 20 page position papers you post online that doesn't mean we don't care about the issues.

Believe me when I say you are going to get a lot farther by talking to us adult to adult about issues than slinging mud.

Embrace the radical thought that if you can show us how your positions will improve our communities, we will be for you.

Explore the equally radical idea that your party might be stronger if it allowed folks to participate as equal members even if they don't agree with your issues litmus test.

Ponder the idea that voters will respond more strongly to candidates that bring us together than those who seek to divide us.

Keep in mind that we don't just look at issues, but we look at the individual-for all their foibles and imperfections-and think "is this the kind of person we want representing us?"

We, the people who win elections, are out here waiting for you. Really, we are...waiting. Who's going to come looking for us?

Santayana Nods...

Peggy Noonan has some interesting observations on this years elections in her article of 9.21.2006.

Now this does not apply to Virginia, obviously, as the words "macaca" and "blogger" and "Mom" and "noose" and "anti-semite" appear nowhere in the article. It is a discussion-albeit general-of issues. However, it does offer a perspective on the congressional elections as they are being fought in the other 49 states.

Bottom line-democratic candidates may be defining themselves simply by their opposition to President Bush as opposed to offering solutions. How will that work out?

Given that this is pretty much how the GOP fought the 1998 congressional elections-based in opposition to a president of the other party rather than offering ideas-I wonder how this plan will work this time around....it may also prove or disprove Santayana's observation on the value of history.

Things like this tick me off

Today's WaPo announces in a page one article that Senator Allen only learned last month of his Jewish heritage. I think this fact goes a long way toward explaining his reaction at the debate to a question that dragged his mother into the Senate election and opened up a matter he was likely still digesting.

However, in the text of the article there is a quote from Mark Rozell that I found both annoying and personally insulting. Commenting on the story, Rozell said: "It's strange that George Allen wasn't more curious about his own heritage and a lot of people are wondering why."

I suggest Mr. Rozell is wrong on both counts.

Point 1: I know from experience that it isn't strange that Allen wasn't more curious

Children follow their parents lead, and if they don't show an interest in a topic children typically do not either...And this habit does not automatically stop when the child becomes an adult. Mother Allen pretty much shut down discussion of her past, and her children chose over the years not to press her. This is not an uncommon thing to do.

I a personal example. My late mother was adopted. She was born to a large West Virginia mining family in the early days of the Great Depression. They couldn't feed another mouth...So they put her up for adoption. She never attempted to search for her birth roots, although my father offered to hire folks who could find out. Her reason: If they didn't care enough to keep me, I don't care enough to find them.

I didn't know until I was 16 that she was adopted, and since she had no desire to start a search I had no compelling reason to do so. In fact, no one in the extended family ever talked about it. Any details I learned about Mom's birth family came through my grandaunt.

I do wonder on occasion, especially as my kids grow. Apparently the birth family name was Bennett, which-combined with Mom's fair skin, freckles, and red hair-has often caused me to think I have Irish blood. This thought is often enhanced by the near fact (gross generalization to follow) that I can talk on the inhale...And loquaciousness has long been a trait attributed to the Irish.

But have I ever searched? Nope. There is always some real world issue more pressing, some project, some problem. It would be interesting to know, but it is a small curiosity rather than a compelling desire. Does this somehow make me a bad person? I doubt it, just as I cannot see how George Allen's failure to quiz his mother on a subject she didn't want to discuss somehow hinders his bid for office.

Which leads me to the second thought:

Point 2: A lot of folks are not wondering about Allen's lack of curiosity

In fact, the only folks who are wondering are people who have a vested interest in focusing attention on his background. This group is limited to the Webb Campaign- which seems intent on not discussing any issues, and journalists/pundits-who need new material for stories.

The rest of us are waiting for the discussion of issues to begin...We can care less about Allen's ethnic background. We want to hear about how these men intend to represent us. We want to hear about how they will vote on the matters that impact our lives in the here and now.

And that is why Rozell's comment ticks me off...Because not only do I find it personally insulting, but it enhances the current path of focusing on anything but the issues facing this country and commonwealth...And those issues are what I want this campaign to focus on.

Shoot, even last year's Kilgore execution advertisements caused discussion about issues and concerns surrounding the death penalty. But this year, there is no real issue discussion, and that is where these campaigns should be focusing.

Unfortunately, this seems unlikely to happen. The Allen campaign has not regained control of the new cycles. The Webb campaign could care less about issues, instead pushing personalities-their next step will be to claim Allen is apicoris...Which will lead to another news cycle where issues are shut out. I can only assume from this they think they have to focus on personality matters because they will lose a campaign that focuses on the issues.

How in the world does all this enhance our knowledge of what these guys will do in the Senate? It doesn't, and that is what Really ticks me off.

The Gout Done Took Me Down

Some might be wondering why I have not offered thoughts, ideas, etc., on the last debate and its aftermath. This is because I have been hit with an attack of Gout.

Gout (also called gouty arthritis, Greek name: podagra, from pod - foot and agra - trap) is a form of arthritis caused by the accumulation of uric acid crystals in joints. It is an intensely painful disease, which in most cases affects only one joint (monoarthritis), most commonly the big toe. The term “gout” comes from the Latin word "gutta" meaning "a drop" from the belief that gout was caused by drops of morbid humors and may be related to the large lumps of urate deposits.

This is frequently caused in eating rich foods, or high protein foods. So, I have been in bed or at work with foot propped up and frankly feeling too ginchy to post. But I get these things every couple of years, and one must soldier on. Jeez, its hell getting old.

However, it is of some small comfort to know the company I keep. One of the most famous sufferers of gout was Henry VIII. Others include John Calvin, Khubilai Khan, Nostradamus, John Milton, Queen Anne, Isaac Newton, Henry Fielding, Samuel Johnson, Charles V, Pablo Neruda, Alfred Lord Tennyson, George IV, John Hancock, Thomas Jefferson, Karl Marx, William Pitt, 1st Earl of Chatham, Benjamin Disraeli, Kirk Reuter, David Wells, Rubens, Lennart Torstenson, Peter Gomes, Alexander Hamilton, George Mason, Benjamin Franklin. (This info thanks to wikipedia.com)

Then again, maybe you haven't wondered...in which case consider the above a Bwanaian effort to bravely fight through his own pain and discomfort to expand your knowledge of physical maladies. Oh, if it helps to maintain said image, just pretend "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" is playing in the background.

Allen v. Webb-The Results

As noted earlier, I did not watch the debate yesterday on MTP between Allen and Webb...however, according to what I have seen on line this AM, the following can be stated about the debate with absolute certainty...

The Allen supporters think Allen won, and the Webb supporters think Webb won.

Dang, that's a cataclysm!

Real winners are those who went to church or got something productive done.

Yep, try as I might I cannot repress my cycnicism about this contest. Round Two today in McLean...

UPDATE-UPDATE--- McLean Debate ---UPDATE-UPDATE
Peggy Fox injects idea of Allen's jewish background into campaign. Webb partisans gleeful and claim Allen had a meltdown. Allen partisans say Webb stood around while Allen faced ridiculous questions from hostile media.

Once again, the partisan bloggers offer up the following result:
The Allen supporters think Allen won, and the Webb supporters think Webb won.

Who'd-A-Thunk-It?

Henry and Lynwood...George and James should follow your lead

This weekend I reread portion of The Governors of Virginia, with it's chapter on Lynwood Holton and several references to Henry Howell...two plainspoken men who held little back. I disagree with many of the positions each of them held, both in terms of ideology and political tactics, but I admire their directness. Neither of them them were big fans of obfuscation and half truths.

This AM I read about the Allen-Webb MTP event. I wish they were reading the same book...because I for one am getting tired of the shadow boxing and lack of forthright statements about the questions that are and will be driving so much of the character issue portion of this campaign.

I missed the Meet the Press mano-a-mano between Senator George Allen and former SecNav James Webb. Some other things got in the way, plus I figure the war over who won would be carried on in print, on the web, etc., so I could catch up later, and would be better able to catch up on what I missed.

Little did I know. The Washington Post ran a sidebar on the debate, and I must admit what I saw infuriated me.

Regarding the "macaca" matter:

On Allen's use of the slur "macaca," in referring to a Webb campaign volunteer of Indian descent

Russert: Where did the word come from? It must have been in your consciousness.
Allen: Oh, it's just made up.
Russert: Made-up word?
Allen: Just made up. Made-up word.
Russert: You'd never heard it before?
Allen: Never heard it before.

He never heard it before, just made it up on the spot? Oh my sweet lord....this has to rank just behind "the dog ate my homework" as the weakest excuse ever. Apparently the Allen campaign has chosen the misceasance over malfeasance way of approaching the matter...which is not exactly a ringing endorsemenet of his abilities as a US senator or as a candidate for higher office.
Webb was no better when it came to his past printed statements:

On a 1979 magazine article by Webb saying women should not serve in combat

Russert: Was it wrong?
Webb: I don't think it was wrong to participate in the debate at that time. It's been 27 years. . . . I am fully comfortable with the roles of women in the military today.

But was he right to say what he said (well, write what he wrote, actually)?

For all his claims to be a forthright fellow, Webb will not be honest and say whether he thinks the opinion was wrong...so much for his inclusion in the updated volume of Profiles in Courage.

More to the point, politically he cannot say anything.

If he says he was right, then he will anger women voters. If he says he was wrong, then Allen can point to that and say it is evidence that people grow, etc., and use it to dispel the whole Flag and Noose matter.

We need a lot more focus on issues, and a lot more forthright effort from the candidates...and we need it now, because Sunday's coming and the election is right around the corner.

As Paul Simon might have said were he a politico:

"Where have you gone, Howell and Holton? The Commonwealth turns its lonely eyes to you."

Today the Post Loves Lowell and Obliquely attacks Allen

Todays Washington Post shows great in finding a way to slam George Allen with a desparate attempt to keep "Macaca" going in the guise of reporting on the presence of paid bloggers in both the Allen and Webb campaigns.

What was especially telling was the moment when-after RaisingKaine explicitly calls Allen a racist-the Post asks Webb spokeswoman Kristian Denny Todd whether she believes Allen is racist. Her reply:

"I don't know. You'll have to ask George Allen." Told about Feld's post, she added, "Well, you know, Lowell doesn't speak for the campaign."

No, but he is a paid campaign staffer who calls the opponent a racist...and whom Jim Webb will neither explicitly support or restrain.

Personally, I don't think George Allen is a racist. I do think he doesn't think, he shoots from the hip, and is far from as reflective as he needs to be. I bet Jim Webb thinks the same thing, too. Only he doesn't have the stones to come out and say it publicly ( at least as of 11:42 AM EST through sources available to me).

This whole thing serves to let us know a few things about the Virginia Senate Race:

1. Lowell Feld has done much to publicize and empower the blogosphere, and I bet when this election is over pound for pound will be considered to be one of the most prominent bloggers in the country.

2. The Washington Post has completely abdicated any real objectivity in the race...but they otherwise get points for creativity in coming up with stories that allow them to work the macaca angle. The problem is that the Post is supposed to be reporting news and keeping opinion in the editorial and opinion section. Of course, they have never done that, so why start now?

3. George Allen will not be able to flee from macacaville, not matter how hard he tries...nor should he. He said it, and now he gets to live with it. Nor will he be able to run from the flag and the noose...nor should he. He had them up, and we either accept his explanation or not.

4. I will continue to wait for the Jim Webb, the man who served courageously in Vietnam, who it is claimed left the Reagan administration over a matter of conscience-to step up and take the place of the pale copy who is running for the Senate in Virginia under he same name. I keep hoping that if that happens, then perhaps the man who was "Born Fighting" and who claims the mantle of Scots-Irish combativeness, will step up and stop hiding behind his paid staffers offering unpaid opinions and say whether he thinks Allen is a racist and put it in his official campaign literature.

If he wants an old West Showdown, then he should step out in the street...and not leave it up to snipers to do his work for him.

When Church and State did not Separate

Fascinating article in today's Washington Post about Berlin's "Nazi Church". It's interior design marks a new and different chapter in the way Germans deal with the physical vestiges of the Third Reich.

Berlin's Martin Luther Memorial Church was planned in 1920, and the exterior is typical of the architecture of the day. But it was finished in 1935, and the church fathers thought it a good idea to curry favor with Hitler. The interior design is replete with attempts to "meld Lutheran theology with Nazi ideology".

The current issue is due to the declining physical plant. It will take millions of dollars to restore the church for usage, and then there is the matter about who would use it. If judged purely on an engineering basis the bulding would come down. However, because of it's history and ties to Hitler, every option is being considered to avoid charges of trying to expunge German history.

It's a fascinating article, and one that reminds me that while the bold sweeps of history may be written by "Great Men", their actions leave room for all type actions-courageous or cowardly, bold or unfortuate-by the people of their time.

Desperation Breeds Silliness

Craig Vitter reports that the Prince William County Democratic party claimed via the Internet that the special election in November 2006 was a choice where "Voters Have Chance to Stop Ladder-Climbing"

The post alleges Sean Connaughton only served as PWm County chair as a stepping stone for higher office, and suggests George Allen is doing the same with the Senate. The post goes on to tout Democratic nominee Sharon Pandak as chairman... "because she loves the County and wants to make it the best possible place to live, work, and play. She is not another ladder-climber."

WOW...does this mean the Prince William County Democratic Committee is not supportive of the efforts of Mark Warner, who clearly used the position of Governor of Virginia as a stepping stone to run for US President?

Maybe this means the Committee will come out against State Senator Charles Colgan (D-Manassas) when he runs for re-election next year because he was serving as Chairman of the PW BOCS when he was elected to the Virginia State Senate!

I can only assume this means they will endorse the re-election of Republican Congressman Frank Wolf (Va-10), who was elected to his position in 1981 and has never voiced a desire to run for any other position. That course of action would make sense, wouldn't it? It is certainly consistent with their reasoning!

Oh, Curse Those Dang Ladder Climbers!

I know I should lump this under the general title of political hypocrisy, but I get tired of the sad repetition of this charge when an elected official seeks another office. It seems that year in and year out:

*If a candidate you support is heading up the ladder, it is a result of leadership, skill, courage, etc.

However...

*If a candidate you do not support is heading up the ladder, it is a result using previous positions solely as stepping stones for an overriding ambition.

It's the same old political bloviation, just another election...and the only people who benefit are the ones who build keyboards...because the more of this stuff goes up, the faster the keyboards have to be replaced!

Alas, I am out of step!

Here I am thinking the matter of interest in the national elections in general and in Virginia in particular is whether the GOP could energize its base.

How silly of me!

Apparently, I had the right idea, but the wrong party. See Tim Graham and CC and Ward Smyth for commentary on how it is the democrats in Virginia who have a base problem due to Jim Webb's candidacy. The A-Team has it up too, but you probably figured that out.

Once again, I am stylishly out of step, like the time in graduate school I attended a wedding early one May morning.

I was resplendent in a tasteful blue seersucker suit, bow tie, and white ducks-perfect, I thought for the event, the time of day, and the weather-warm, but with a slight piedmont breeze. At the reception I was accosted by a Grand Dutchess of Etiquette who, fortified by several gin and tonics, thought it was proper to politely but pointedly mention that I--Faux Pas Alert!-- was wearing white shoes before Memorial Day.

Still, just as that May day I thanked the Dutchess that day and calmly reached for more ham biscuits, today I will stick with my perspective and reach for my coffee. Webb's affect-whatever it may be-stops at Virginia's borders. The matter of the disaffection of the GOP base and the possibility of diminished turnout is in play in every federal election this fall.

The Real Problem for Republicans...

As Mercutio lays dying in Act III of Romeo and Juliet, he curses both the Monagues and Capulets, saying "A Plague on both your houses! You have made worm's meat of me..."

In 2006, the Reagan conservatives play the part of Mercutio, but this time Mercutio is going to be the butcher.

As I jetted around the blogosphere this AM, I saw where the inimitable James Atticus Bowden offered this comment (in part) in a discussion about the Webb ad:

Also, the Democrat Party has gone too far to the Left to get the Reagan Democrats back. The challenge for Republicans is to not tax and spend worse than the Dems at the Federal and state levels - and lose their Conservative base.

I think James is on the right track, especially given what we saw in the last Presidential election, where President Bush won in great part via maximum turnout of the base.

However, if there is as great a difference between the parties as he suggests, the issue is not losing the base per se, but getting them to turn them out to vote.

Last year I blogged on how Abraham Lincoln captured a simple formula to win elections. The basis of his plan is to identify your people and get them to the polls...and while modern technology will make it relatively easy for the GOP to identify, whether they will turn out or not is another story.

I am told that at a recent GOP fundraiser in Northern Virginia John McCain said he was not worried about losing the GOP base, but that he was worried about them turning out.

And therein lies the rub...and I think it puts the GOP in a bad position.

The economic expansion of the 1990's was not just a matter of the IT boom. It was also a matter of government economies. Since 2000, The GOP has overseen spending increases-both military and not-and tax cuts that have caused the deficit to balloon. There is not even lip service to federal fiscal frugality.

The old-time Reagan GOP conservative (of which I number myself) focus on economic and foreign policy conservatism has given way to a greater focus on conservative social issues, which in tandem makes the GOP a less welcoming home for some...and the real question is whether this segment of voters-both in Virginia and across the nation-feel a desire to vote in 2006 or not. In addition, GOP loyalists more and more demand adherence to a punch list of policy positions. How will this demand for complete conformity play with voters?

I don't think it is a question of who JAB identified GOP base will vote for. I do think it is a question of whether they are motivated to get up, stand up, and vote. If they don't, then Mercutio's ultimate end will be fate of this year's GOP candidate dreams...and an interesting prelude to the 2008 Presidential campaign.

...and so it begins...

A few days ago I offered an opinion that James Webb should pull his "Reagan" advertisement in deference to the wishes of Nancy Reagan. I suggested that he could get more free publicity and likely score more points by being a stand-up guy by pulling the ad. He did not.

I predicted that if he didn't, especially given the comments made by his campaign managers in a book they authored, that he was opening the door to a response ad by Allen.

Not that any of this takes too much imagination...once the ad ran the rest was almost pre-ordained. As they say in books on chess tactics, "once you say A, you must say B".

Well, the other shoe has dropped. Kilo has the new Allen ad via YouTube at http://kilosparksitup.blogspot.com/, and I later found the YouTube link in a discussion at NotLarrysabato:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EiaYl89ehTM

I have given some thought to why the Webb campaign did not pull the ad. Had they vetted the ad, calculated there would be a request to yank it, and thought it would give Webb more publicity?

I tend to think not, and that what is more likely is that the Webbistas did not think Mrs. Reagan would object, and did not have a back-up ad ready, so they felt they had to run the ad or else they would be wasting the money they had paid for the television time slots.

One might think "how could they not have had another ad in place, ready to go?" I think the answer is because Webb is low on money, and that they have spent what they have on more immediate needs or have already committed it to buying time down the road, looking to use future monies to film the new advertisements.

Now all that is left for me to claim my Oracular status is for a Nancy advertisement to come out.

A Plaintive Plea to SST

Please, please, please...

Can someone convince the http://sicsempertyrannis.blogspot.com/ crew to open their blog again?

I miss them.

Who is Running the Show?

The Virginia Senate race is billed as one of the high profile US Senate races of 2006. If true, how did the candidates come up with such poorly run campaigns?

On the Allen front, clearly they were expecting to cruise to an easy win. Given the lack of Webb fundraising, that probably would have happened...until "macaca" happened. Then the Allen campaign stumbled over itself, tried to temporize, did not apologize quickly, and allowed the incident to become a story that breathed new life into the Webb campaign and probably torpedoed Allen's chances at the 2008 GOP presidential nod.

Why no quick response? Why no effort to cauterize fast? The Allen team had to know the WaPo and other media outlets were looking for a story in the dog days of August, and Team Allen handed it to them.

Meanwhile, the Team Webb has been unable to raise money, and the time is coming when the ability to produce tv ads and then buy adequate time is running short. They have put all their eggs in the Anti-Iraq campaign basket, and have done precious little to get out Webb's views on other issues. Without the fundraising, do they have the resources to go so negative on Allen that folks will vote for Webb even though they know next to nothing about Webb's positions?

Yeah, yeah, I know that there are position papers galore on the website, and all you have to do is go online...but how many people are going to take the time to do that? I suggest that the folks who take the time to search out position papers are not the folks who you need to reach via television and mail.

Even in the current Annapolis imbroglio over Webb's 1979 article, the Webbistas are clubfooted. You will note that in his response to the Allen press conference Webb says:

"I did not anticipate the widespread reaction to this magazine article, and to the extent that my writing subjected women at the Academy or the active Armed Forces to undue hardship, I remain profoundly sorry."

First, how could a skilled campaign team not have anticipated the Allen campaign would bring this matter up? Second, why would they put out an apology that apologizes for causing hardship, but not for writing the piece in the first place?

The idea at times like this is to deal with the issue quickly and completely. Like Allen's failure to deal with "macaca" quickly, this apology does not close down the matter and leaves room for the Allen campaign to come back that Webb is not taking responsibility for writing the article.

We have two heavyweight candidates slugging it out for one of the highest elected positions in our republic, and the tones and manner of their campaigns is closer to Beavis and Butthead than Lincoln and Douglas.

I wish the campaigns they were running-or perhaps just the management of those campaigns-reflected the importance of the race.

Goes?

A front page article in today’s Washington Post reports yesterday's Allen campaign press conference bringing up James Webb 1979 Washingtonian article “Women Can’t Fight”, focusing on certain passages that the session’s attendees, all USNA grads, said made their time at Annapolis very difficult and "infected the brigade with hate and divisive anger."

The Post article is titled “Va. Senate Race Goes Negative on 1979 Essay”

My question is about the verb “goes”. Has Mr. Brother Shear’s been following this campaign? The tile suggests the negativity is a recent thing…when he knows full well it has not.

This campaign has been nasty going back to the early days of the Democratic primary. It reached new heights after Allen’s macaca comment, when the democrats-especially bloggers-used tortuous logic to assert that Allen had to know he was insulting a Webb staffer. Allen is now referred to as a racist on a regular basis. His campaign manager, Dick Wadhams, has his name re-jiggered by ardent Webbistas into an insulting name.

But now that something of Webb’s past has been brought up, and people who were injured by it are stepping up, only now has the campaign become negative?

Give me break. This race went negative a long time ago, and it will get worse. Let’s not act as if it only recently got bad.

It is a Freedom from, not a Freedom of

I understand from a radio report this AM that Boston University has implemented new policies that forbid obscene, racist, or sexist chants at athletic events. Apparently the traditional ice hockey cheer of “Rough ‘em Up” was updated by the some expressive students…I think you know what I mean.

What caught my attention was a student who protested this decision. This Unknown BU Student (a/k/a UBUS) said these regulations violated the students first amendment rights to free speech…proving once again that too many of us misunderstand the concept of “Freedom of Speech”. What UBUS wants is not freedom of speech, but freedom from consequences.

We don’t have the freedom to say just anything we want. We have the freedom from the federal government creating laws that abridge free speech.

Amendment I to the US Constitution reads:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

This amendment was a reaction to the pre-American revolution colonial policy where colonists could be jailed for speaking against the King, British policies, etc. The Founding Fathers wanted to ensure that people could speak their mind without fear of government retribution.

This is not the same as unlimited freedom to say what we want.

At the most basic level, we are or can be constrained in free expression by the group/organization we choose to be a part of. There is no rule against telling someone they are fat, but our society considers it unacceptable behavior so typically we don’t say things like that.

The merchant who puts out intricately worded ads that use fine print to camouflage real meaning generally lose customers. Merchants who voice personal opinions that are obnoxious to their customers likewise run the risk of losing business.

The musical group Dixie Chicks are the current poster children for this situation .

At the beginning of the Iraq conflict they spoke badly of President Bush while in a foreign country. Their record sales suffered. They complained “what about freedom of speech?” They failed to consider that perhaps those that buy their music might not agree with their position or how they chose to express it. However, they did not go to jail for their expressed opinion. The Chicks got their Freedom of Speech…but that did not mean they got a free ride from the reaction to their comments.

Politicians are regularly chastised and even removed from positions or party affiliation because they announce a different position. Politicians announce their positions on issues. If their constituents disagree, then said politician loses his next election.

There are rules against racist and sexist language in the workplace. You can get fired for saying the wrong thing to the wrong person.

But in all these arenas the regulation is done by the individual, a business organization, a political party, the electorate, the public, etc. It is not done by the federal government.

If a recognized public interest is at stake, there can be restrictions. Speech that needlessly endangers other people is not protected speech. In Schenck v. U.S.(1919), the US Supreme Court set limits on the freedom of speech guaranteed by the First Amendment to the Constitution. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Junior, wrote: "The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic."

We don’t enjoy Freedom of Speech.

We do enjoy a Freedom of Speech without Fear of Government Retribution, which in turn generally allows us to say what we want when we want to.

I hope the UBUS referenced above attends a constitutional law class prior to graduation, and I dearly wish that the oodles and oodles folks who whine because they are not allowed to say something or suffer some backlash from what they say will take the time to read the Bill of Rights and learn what their rights really are.

It does make your stomach turn

Unbelievable

It never ceases to amaze me how people try to cash in on a tragedy.

Fall 2006 Virginia Blogosphere Book Fair

It is time for a new Virginia Blog event; The Fall Book Fair!

When I was a little guy-you know, during the Nixon administration-we had book fairs in the fall and spring. During that magic week the school library was loaded with books to purchase. You checked out the merchandise, placed an order, and about six weeks later you got your books.

At this point the internet generation is thinking “Six Weeks? Why so long?”

As an adult, I see various publications having their version of a book fair…Time, MSNBC, the Washington Post and others publish a list of upcoming books at the beginning of the various seasons. Occasionally bloggers will offer their ideas on good books to read.

I like this. It gives me an advance idea of what I want to buy, what I want to get from the library, and what I will hope to find a year later at the Green Valley Book Fair.

Nowadays, amidst the partisan sturm und drang of the internet, it seems we are getting away from discussion and the sharing of ideas and more and more into violent barbs, which then turns the internet in general and weblogs in particular into echo chambers where everything is said and nothing is heard.

So, in an effort to facilitate a greater sense of intellectual comity to the Virginia blogosphere, Renaissance Ruminations will host the Fall 2006 Virginia Blogosphere Book Fair. Please send me a list of books you recommend others read, and I will put it up with your comments. Structure will be similar to that used in the Virginia Blog Carnivals.

These can be old favorites, new discoveries, or just books you think folks will enjoy! If you have already posted a list of books you like with your reasoning, semd me the links and I will post that instead of a book list.

Deadline for submissions is 9/25/2006, with submissions published shortly thereafter. Please limit submissions to five (5) books to renaissanceruminations@hotmail.com

Information needed: At minumum, at least the title, author. I would also like to hear why you recommend it. Amazon/Bn link and/or ISBN number is not needed, but is appreciated.

It’s a chance to let folks know what you are reading, and a chance to get reading ideas from a bunch of sources you might no otherwise converse with!

I look forward to hearing from you!
Bwana

I wish I wrote as well as Peggy Noonan

Peggy Noonan-9/8/2006 in opinionjournal.com

I Just Called to Say I Love You
The sounds of 9/11, beyond the metallic roar.
Friday, September 8, 2006 12:01 a.m. EDT

Everyone remembers the pictures, but I think more and more about the sounds. I always ask people what they heard that day in New York. We've all seen the film and videotape, but the sound equipment of television crews didn't always catch what people have described as the deep metallic roar.

The other night on TV there was a documentary on the Ironworkers of New York's Local 40, whose members ran to the site when the towers fell. They pitched in on rescue, then stayed for eight months to deconstruct a skyscraper some of them had helped build 35 years before. An ironworker named Jim Gaffney said, "My partner kept telling me the buildings are coming down and I'm saying 'no way.' Then we heard that noise that I will never forget. It was like a creaking and then the next thing you felt the ground rumbling."

Rudy Giuliani said it was like an earthquake. The actor Jim Caviezel saw the second plane hit the towers on television and what he heard shook him: "A weird, guttural discordant sound," he called it, a sound exactly like lightning. He knew because earlier that year he'd been hit. My son, then a teenager in a high school across the river from the towers, heard the first plane go in at 8:45 a.m. It sounded, he said, like a heavy truck going hard over a big street grate.

I think too about the sounds that came from within the buildings and within the planes--the phone calls and messages left on answering machines, all the last things said to whoever was home and picked up the phone. They awe me, those messages.
Something terrible had happened. Life was reduced to its essentials. Time was short. People said what counted, what mattered. It has been noted that there is no record of anyone calling to say, "I never liked you," or, "You hurt my feelings." No one negotiated past grievances or said, "Vote for Smith." Amazingly --or not--there is no record of anyone damning the terrorists or saying "I hate them."

No one said anything unneeded, extraneous or small. Crisis is a great editor. When you read the transcripts that have been released over the years it's all so clear.

Flight 93 flight attendant Ceecee Lyles, 33 years old, in an answering-machine message to her husband: "Please tell my children that I love them very much. I'm sorry, baby. I wish I could see your face again."

Thirty-one-year-old Melissa Harrington, a California-based trade consultant at a meeting in the towers, called her father to say she loved him. Minutes later she left a message on the answering machine as her new husband slept in their San Francisco home. "Sean, it's me, she said. "I just wanted to let you know I love you."

Capt. Walter Hynes of the New York Fire Department's Ladder 13 dialed home that morning as his rig left the firehouse at 85th Street and Lexington Avenue. He was on his way downtown, he said in his message, and things were bad. "I don't know if we'll make it out. I want to tell you that I love you and I love the kids."

Firemen don't become firemen because they're pessimists. Imagine being a guy who feels in his gut he's going to his death, and he calls on the way to say goodbye and make things clear. His widow later told the Associated Press she'd played his message hundreds of times and made copies for their kids. "He was thinking about us in those final moments."

Elizabeth Rivas saw it that way too. When her husband left for the World Trade Center that morning, she went to a laundromat, where she heard the news. She couldn't reach him by cell and rushed home. He'd called at 9:02 and reached her daughter. The child reported, "He say, mommy, he say he love you no matter what happens, he loves you." He never called again. Mrs. Rivas later said, "He tried to call me. He called me."

There was the amazing acceptance. I spoke this week with a medical doctor who told me she'd seen many people die, and many "with grace and acceptance." The people on the planes didn't have time to accept, to reflect, to think through; and yet so many showed the kind of grace you see in a hospice.

Peter Hanson, a passenger on United Airlines Flight 175 called his father. "I think they intend to go to Chicago or someplace and fly into a building," he said. "Don't worry, Dad--if it happens, it will be very fast." On the same flight, Brian Sweeney called his wife, got the answering machine, and told her they'd been hijacked. "Hopefully I'll talk to you again, but if not, have a good life. I know I'll see you again some day."

There was Tom Burnett's famous call from United Flight 93. "We're all going to die, but three of us are going to do something," he told his wife, Deena. "I love you, honey."

These were people saying, essentially, In spite of my imminent death, my thoughts are on you, and on love. I asked a psychiatrist the other day for his thoughts, and he said the people on the planes and in the towers were "accepting the inevitable" and taking care of "unfinished business." "At death's door people pass on a responsibility--'Tell Billy I never stopped loving him and forgave him long ago.' 'Take care of Mom.' 'Pray for me, Father. Pray for me, I haven't been very good.' " They address what needs doing.

This reminded me of that moment when Todd Beamer of United 93 wound up praying on the phone with a woman he'd never met before, a Verizon Airfone supervisor named Lisa Jefferson. She said later that his tone was calm. It seemed as if they were "old friends," she later wrote. They said the Lord's Prayer together. Then he said "Let's roll."

This is what I get from the last messages. People are often stronger than they know, bigger, more gallant than they'd guess. And this: We're all lucky to be here today and able to say what deserves saying, and if you say it a lot, it won't make it common and so unheard, but known and absorbed.
I think the sound of the last messages, of what was said, will live as long in human history, and contain within it as much of human history, as any old metallic roar.